1058. Misbranding of Davis Formula No. 7895 and standardized solution of vita-
min A, and Anti-Ur-Acid and vitamin Bt tablets. TJ. S. v. Edward R.
Davis (E. R. Davis Prescription Co.). Plea of guilty. Fines, $500 on
eount 1 and $1 each on counts 2 and 3, plus costs. (F. D. C. No. 7742.
Sample Nos. 23097-E, 93233-E, 95346-E.)
On July 30, 1943, the United States attorney for the Western District of Wash-
ington filed an information against Edward R. Dayis, trading as the E. R. Davis
Prescription Co., at Bellingham, Wash., alleging shipment from the State of Wash-
ington into the State of California, on or about December 17, 1941, and June 23,
1942, of a number of cartons, each containing a bottle of Davis Formula No. 7895
and a bottle of Standardized Solution of Vitamin A; and into the State of Oregon,
on or about May 14, 1942, of a carton containing a box of Anti-Ur-Acid powder
and a box of vitamin Bi tablets.
Analysis showed that the Davis Formula No. 7895 consisted essentially of
potassium iodide, an extract of a plant drug such as Lobelia, a small proportion
of chloroform, sugar, alcohol, and water; and that the solution of vitamin A
contained 32,500 U. S. P. units of vitamin A per gram.
The formula and the solution of vitamin A were alleged to be misbranded in
that the statements in their labeling which represented and suggested that, when
used as directed, with the diet suggested, they would be an adequate treatment
for asthma, including bronchial and spasmodic asthma, were false and misleading
since they would not be an adequate treatment for such conditions.
Analysis showed that the Anti-Ur-Acid was a powder consisting essentially
of magnesium sulfate, potassium bitartrate, and sodium bicarbonate; and that
the vitamin Bi tablets contained between 0.90 mg. and 0.95 mg. of the vitamin per
tablet.
The powder and the vitamin Bi tablets were alleged to be misbranded in that
the name "Anti-Ur-Acid" was misleading, since the name suggested and created
the impression in the mind of the reader that the articles would neutralize and
correct excess uric acid, whereas they would not neutralize or correct excess
uric acid. They were alleged to be misbranded further in that the name "Anti-
Ur-Acid," and the statements in the labeling which represented and suggested
that rheumatic, neuritic, and arthritic pains, gout, dropsy, and similar disease
conditions, suggested by the abbreviation "etc.," were caused by excess uric acid
and that the articles would be efficacious in the treatment of those conditions, were
false and misleading since those disease conditions are not caused by excess uric
acid, and the articles would not be efficacious for the purposes claimed. The
articles were alleged to be misbranded further in that the labeling failed to bear
adequate directions for use, since the statement "Take about y2 hour before
breakfast" created the impression that the powder should be taken every morning,
whereas the powder was a laxative and should not be taken continuously.
On November 20, 1943, the defendant having entered a plea of guilty, the court
imposed fines of $500 on count 1 and $1 each on counts 2 and 3, plus costs, a total
fine of $543.60.